Since Trudeau's Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms neglected to explicitly provide protection of private property, Canadian's have wondered where they stand, exactly, when they are denied a "permit", suffer "injurious affection" through land-use planning, or are otherwise abused by discriminatory regulations.
Recently, our friends at the Ontario Landowners Association have passed along a 1989 McGill Law Journal article that correctly identifies Provincial Statutory Law as the enabler of "injurious affection" and associated regulatory takings.
This is why we at the Canadian Landowner Alliance endeavor to have protective property rights legislation enacted in our Canadian Provincial Legislatures as a counterbalance to typical modern-day "environmental legislation" which often contain "No Remedy" clauses such as this in Ontario:
No costs, compensation or damages are owing or payable to any person and no remedy, including but not limited to a remedy in contract, restitution, tort or trust, is available to any person
and/or
Nothing done or not done in accordance with this Act or the regulations made under it constitutes an expropriation or injurious affection for the purposes of the Expropriations Act or otherwise at law
"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." Hmmmm, I think we're f*#$*d.
ReplyDeletePretty much. Nothing at all to indicate that our great dense snoring masses even knows what liberty is, let alone giving a sign that they want it.
DeleteWhatever do you mean Saul? Our North American youth receive excellent education, including a balanced history of Austrian and Keynsian economic theory; the links between liberty, opportunity and general prosperity; as well as the basic tenets that evoked contracts such as the Magna Carta and the American Constitution. I just don't know what you mean by "great dense snoring masses"....Buuuaahahahaha
DeleteI don't know why anybody would expect to be compensated for land that is needed for environmental reasons. Land is a public resource and I don't know why farmers or ranchers think they own it. They are just caretakers.
ReplyDeleteI wish you had seen your shadow on Feb. 2. But since you didn't I guess it is time for your weekly spanking again. I'm beginning to think that you like it.
DeleteUnless you are living in a cast-off cardboard box on Crown Land somewhere, you are a hypocrite for saying what you just said. If you have a roof over your head, it is because somebody "owned" the property and built something on it. And that owner had the money to do so because he or somebody else made a dollar on 'owned' land. Be careful what you wish for, you fool.